why haven't wheels seen any significant advancements over the years? i mean, surely something more permanent than rubber is in order yes? what about a polymer that hardens and softens when voltage is applied to it, based on the terrain so that it has a longer lifespan?
>>13988235
>long lifespan
Yes, just what we need, something to make cars go BOOM when hit by lightening.
Tires are a wear component and have to be disposable by necessity. This makes it difficult to put advanced technology in them. Something like you suggest could cost more than the car itself, and it would still degrade and break eventually.
>>13988248
my point was that we have an entire infrastructure built around the production and disposal of high volume tires, which is a waste of space and resources. something like this could help open up options in the future for the auto industry when it comes to things like maintenance, rather than just replacement.
>>13988241
try harder next time
>>13988261
Except that material will degrade much faster.
>>13988267
no. stiffer on smooth, softer on rough, more grip without the normal forces from the tire conflicting with the normal forces of the road, thus diminishing wear.
>>13988235
>why haven't wheels seen any significant advancements over the years?
Wheels and tires have seen huge advancements over the years.
> captcha: exit 1/4 mile
>>13988273
That's not how this works anon....
>>13988285
yes. you get the tire to keep traction within a threshold that doesn't lead to chronic wear. that's just a matter of distribution.
>>13988272
lol you are trying so hard to start a vette vs gtr thread huh
>>13988297
It's not just a matter of distribution.
There is heat, material interaction, weight, not to mention compound.
Much of which the compounds you are suggesting suck at as it is.
>>13988301
>>13988307
so then it's just a matter of material science. polymer that can have electrorheological properties with a high coefficient of friction. how is that hard?
This is a wheel.
This is metal.
Tire is rubber.
Learn the difference
>>13988317
It's not just because of it being "hard".
Efficiency + cost = production sales.
Being efficient is only as good as the final cost of production and sales.
this means each wheel would have to have sensors created into them, both wireless systems and control systems that could be maintained at high speeds, to send power into the wheel itself (which means the wheel itself would also have to have either connections (wireless nodes) or packs built into them to send the eletrical systems. this also means that you would need extra power generated from the engine/motor while it's running, which means more draw away from actual horesepower and also lower fuel mileage because of draw on the engine.
In turn you also have to create safety systems to not over generate power to a point of shocking a person, keeping the car safely grounded on top of that.
It's not worth the actual time and effort to create an entire system like that for even 3 times the amount of miles per tire.
>>13988319
embarrassing
>>13988317
How exactly are you going to keep static from all that friction not effecting the material in the first place?
Ultimately there is no business case for such product to exist.
>>13988235
more permanant? try just rolling around on solid steel, itll last longer. also weight alot more and provide no traction.
See heres the thing, the stiffer the tire, the longer it lasts, and the less grip you get.
